THE POTENT AMULETS

CRRS 655 (ISBS) by Lecturer Prof. Jeremy Saul, Ph.D.

Mini Paper-2 on 04 November 2014 of Ven. Husen Dhammahuto (5638620)

THE POTENT AMULETS 

The Amulet’s Words

“Amulet” is derived from the Old Latin AMOLETUM, i.e. a “means of defence” (SELIGMANN (Heil and Schutzmittel, Stuttgart, 1920, p. 26)).  In addition, the word AMULET is borrowed from the Latin AMULÈTUM, which we find in PLINY, who uses the word to indicate:

(i)                 an object which preserves a man from some trouble;

(ii)               medical or prophylactic treatment;

(iii)             a substance used in medicine

Stengs claimed that the importance of the power amulets that is attributed to powerful objects dates back at least to the time of the Buddha. Anyhow, the protective power of an amulets works only for those who are morally good.[1]

According to Sheila Paine, an amulet is a device, the purpose of which is to protect, but by magical and not physical means – a lump of meteorite worn against gunfire is an amulet, a bullet-proof vest is not. Moreover, an amulet is part of such a system of natural and magical force. The invisible aura of an unusual stone, the perfume of a pungent plant, the tortured shape of a root, the soaring power of an eagle, all such phenomena can be used to redress the imbalance of evil influences.

Then the Cambridge dictionary claimed that potent is the adjective word that means very powerful, forceful or effective. So, this title talks about the very powerful of a device (an amulet) that the purpose is to defence or protect.

The Amulets’ Source and Progress

            Sheila mentioned that the story of amulets is a continuous one from prehistoric times to the present day. Texts from Sumer show that the evil eye was known from about the fourth or third millennium BC, while amulets survive in huge numbers from Ancient Egypt. A Chinese jade amulet of a boar-dragon from the Hongshan culture of about 3600 to 3000 BC is drilled with a hole to wear as a pendant and is similar to objects six thousand years old. They were used as ritual offerings to deities and spirits for protection, while later ones of the Eastern Zhou dynasty, such as the emperor's amuletic pendant of around 400 BC made of white jade hung on red strings as stipulated in the Book of Rites, were also a sign of status.

Meanwhile, Wallis Budge argued that the amulets worn by primitive men and women were made of simple natural substances, and at first were chosen simply because they were of unusual form and colour, or because their substance was new to them. The oldest amulets were objects which roused man’s curiosity, or excited his wonder and admiration, and his natural love of possession led him to make them his own property, and to make them to his dwelling.

            The portions of their bodies with which animals and reptiles slew their prey also attracted his attention, and hence the horns, claws, teeth and tails of animals, and the skin of serpents, were used as amulets at a very early period. The dwellers on the sea-coast, and on lakes filled with fish, made amulets of shells and parts of fishes; and little fingers, toes, eyes, phalli and hair of human beings have been regarded as powerful amulets in many countries.

            Objects colored white, blue, red, and yellow have more often been chosen as amulets than those which were grey or brown or black. As soon as man learned the art of working in metals he made many amulets, in many forms, in gold, silver, copper and iron. When he had learned to write figures of men, animals, birds, fish, trees and plants cut in stone or wood, or drawn upon some substance which served as a writing material, were also used by him as amulets.

            Within this earthly and celestial world, concepts of the symbolism of astrology, of numbers and colors, of alchemy and magic, of wind, sun and moon are all harnesses into the power of amulets. And into this world intruded, the established religions of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Taoism, Shinto and Hinduism.

            Actually, we shall never know accurately what primitive man expected his various amulets to do for him, or how he thought they worked for his good, but it is quite clear from the number and variety of them that there was no one amulet which he believed to be capable of protecting him from every danger.  

The Amulet’s Makers

            According to Sheila Paine that the truly professional makers of amulets fall into two distinct categories, for both of whom this work is something of a sideline. The one bases his power in magic – like the creator of the red plastic and wolf toe confection – and the other in religion.

1.      The amulet makers whose field is magic are variously described as medicine men, witch doctors, herbalists, healers. For all of them it is the magical potency of plants, of the tree barks, of animal parts, of arcane substance that they harness into an amulet.

2.      The amulet makers of religious persuasion are the guardians of Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples, the monks of impoverished monasteries, the holy men of Islam, who supply folded pieces of inscribed paper. These men will make amulets but only at a high price and as a mark of respect to their standing: their main function remains that of the revered holy man of the village.

3.      A third category of amulet makers are the amateurs. These are usually mothers, married at fourteen, illiterate, uncomprehending, whose babies have died inexplicably one after another.

Meanwhile interestingly in the Thailand Language, which they illustrative for the autonomous power of amulets by not using the word buy (ซื้อ or sue) when it comes to purchase of an amulet, but the word renting, hiring or leasing (เช่า or chaw) instead. This shows that one never can become the actual owner of amulet. It is more that one temporarily has the opportunity to take advantage of its power.[2]

Yet the mass-produced Thai amulet is a commodity like any other item that is produced to be sold on the consumers market. Similarly in the true Marxian of “commodity fetishes” that ‘This division of the product of labor into a useful thing and a thing possessing value appears in practice only when exchange has already acquired a sufficient extension and importance to allow useful things to be produced for the purpose of being exchanged, so, that their character as values has already to be taken into consideration during production’ (Capital Vol I, 1982: 166).[3]  

The Potent Amulets in Thailand

            According to Stengs that Amulets in Thailand were sold in the temples and the “second hand” markets. This does not mean that the value of those amulets is lower than that of newly produced amulets. On contrary, older series generally will rise in price, and during the last decade the prices for some of the rarer old amulets have rocketed sky high.[4] In the below cited from one website to show the “antique potent amulets.”

            The Grand 5 Sacred Buddha Amulets (Phra Benjapakee) by ahaina website are Phra Somdej (King of Amulet), Phra Nang Phaya (Queen of Amulet), Phra Rod, Phra Phong Supan, Phra Somkor. We can see like this:

          1. Phra Somdej (King of Amulet)

Phra Somdej were created by Somdej Phra BuddhaJahn Toh Prommarangsri (Somdej Toh). He’s a son of　King Rama I. He started to make Phra Somdej amulets in B.E. 2409. Materials for making Phra somdej comprise: Shell lime, holy powder, assorted flowers from shine, rice, lotus, ashes, honey, banana, tang oil, etc. Then chanted with spells and meditate. To bless every life in this world for good karma and strong protection against negative energy. Total of 84,000 amulets was made at the time. Phra Somdej Wat Rakhang is once of the most famous and the best amulets from Thailand.

       2. Phra Nang Phaya (Queen of Amulet)

Phra Nang Phaya were created during of Ayuttaya era, Pitsanulok province. The major discovered are from Wat Nang Phaya around B.E.2444. The temple was said to be built for merits making to his Queen, the mother of King Naresuan, the Thai people given name “Queen of Thailand amulets”. Phra Nang Phaya are　very famous for bless strong with attractiveness and respectful from all others, also power on charm and　safe from all dangers.

        3. Phra Rod

Phra Rod was created by a hermit. First discovered during the earlier days of King Rama 5 reign when a pagoda from Wat Mahawan in Lumpoon province. The Thai people regard this particular amulet as　Buddha of Escape, they have superb Buddhistic power, especially in protection and being safe from all　dangers and disasters or misfortunes. They are made of clay and the oldest once are over 1,250 years old.

        4. Phra Phong Supan

Phra Phong Supan were discovered on B.E. 2456 in Wat Phra Sri Ratanamahathat, Supan Buri province. According to a golden scripture found together in the pagoda which described that Phra Phong Supan was created by Phra Mahathera PiyaThassi Saribut during the period of King Bormrajathiraj 2nd. It has strong ”U-thong” art style. Most of unique of this amulets is at the back had a thumb print of the creator.　A superb Buddha amulets had all mighty protective power against weapon and bring good luck. Is the most powerful amulet of ever.

        5. Phra Somkor

Phra Somkor were first discovered on B.E. 2392 in Wat Phra Boromathat. Gumpangpeth province. The amulets were created in the era King Phra Maha Dharmarajalitai, the 5th king of Sukhothai. Phra Somkor is a mixture of Sukhothai-Lanka (Sri Lanka) style. It form a sitting posture of a thumb shape. According to memorandum of Wat Phra Boromathat, Phra Somkor amulets were made by 11 hermits or Phra Lersi using special materials and invited Devadas to create the molds. There is a slogan for Phra Somkor ”If you have me, you never get poor”. Estimated to be made some 550 years.

Moreover Stanley Jeyaraja Tambiah would like to differentiate four classes of potent amulets in Thailand:

1.      Amulet representations of famous and historic Buddha Images, which have played the roles of palladia of the Thai kingdoms.

2.      Amulets that owe their fame to the reputation of famous Buddhist monks, especially of the nineteenth century, who sponsored their making and sacralized them. The most famous of them are called Phra Somdet and Phra kling.

3.      Miscellaneous amulets, a large residual class of representations of gods, humans, animals, birds, and anomalous beings, sacralized by monks and lay experts skilled in saiyasāt (“base art).

4.      The contemporary amulets being blessed by the forest-dwelling meditation masters, some of whom are acclaimed as “saints” (arahants).

Nicola Tannenbaum who write his paper of “Tattoos: Invulnerability and Power in Shan Cosmology” argued that both Buddhist and animist practices are integrally related and are derived from a single worldview structured on the existence of morally neutral power. This worldview and the political realities state systems account for animist practices and Buddhist elements, which are incorporated into the religious system. Actually in my opinion, his argument was closed to be well that Buddhism and animism walk together. But this practice is only for the beginner level, which need to do rituals or ceremonies. For at least of the “stream enter” or “Sotapana level” and upper levels, they do not believe in the rituals and ceremonies again, tend to practice only the Buddha’s teaching that included of insight meditation (Vipassana meditation).

Some people argued that the potent amulets as represent of Buddha, like in the Kaliṅgabodhi Jātaka (J., IV, 228), Ānanda desires to set up in the Jetavana a substitute for the Buddha, so that people may be able to make their offerings of flowers, not only when the Buddha is in residence, but also when he is away preaching elsewhere. Then Buddha asks to Ānanda about how many of cetiya there are, Ānanda answers that three of cetiya – those of the body (sārīrika), those of association (paribhoga), and those prescribed (uddesika). The Buddha rejects of his body as relic at that time, except he already demise. So, the associated symbols, example: the boddhi tree, the wheel (cakra), the footprints, and so on. Even, the amulet did not mentioned by the Buddha, but many famous monks in Thailand made and sacralized the potent amulets. They legalized the potent amulets as part of cetiya that can represent of Buddha, because the Buddha was already demise. 

Fortunately, Stengs said that Amulets in Thailand were sold in the temples and the “second hand” markets. So, I think with this reality that mean can to reduce the jobless indirectly in economic development. The market amulets could take several employers in their one store, which in one market may be more than 100 stores in ‘Tha Phra Chan’ Bangkok; Thailand.

In addition, Stengs suggested that their value at the collectors market should similarly be seen as an expression of the social relationships between the collectors. The amulets markets in this sense can be understood as a condensed model of the highly competitive and hierarchical world of the Thai men.[5]

Furthermore, in Aṅguttara Nikaya III; 208 (22/212) about five kinds of Micchāvaṇijjā (Trading which is wrong Dhamma) are:

1.      Trading in things which kill living beings

2.      Trading in human beings (slave trading, prostitute).

3.      Trading in animals which are to be slaughtered for food.

4.      Trading in intoxicating liquors.

5.      Trading in poisons.

These five kinds of trading are prohibited for Buddhist lay devotees (upāsaka).  So, to sale the potent amulets does not include in the trading of wrong Dhamma. The blacksmiths, makers, sacralizer, sales, traders, user are seemed happy as part of potent amulets circulation. In addition, the economic of amulets market is going to grow increased.  

            Mr. Charoen gave the example story of the power amulet that in a newspaper article about the Thai Airways plane crash in China, early in 1997, which left many people dead, the only person who was not harmed at all was wearing a Luang Puu Thuad amulet.[6] I guess his fortunate came to this guy, but maybe he was very guilty of this accident that his amulet can not save all passengers too.

On the other hand, in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta mentioned that after the Buddha parinibbana (demise), only his teaching (Dhamma) and the discipline (Vinaya) are the represent of him. The Buddha never suggested to his disciples to worship the statues (images), the potent amulets, as represent him-self.

Durrenberger (1981b)[7] argues that monks as nonreciprocating superiors provide a fixed standard to rank competitors. Through their offering to monks they make claims that their power has a base in morality. So, the Buddhist devotees should offer some basic needed to the monks and keep morality as good as well rather than depend to the power amulets. According to my understanding that nonreciprocating of monk is because all of Buddhist devotees as direct or indirect, quick or long, this life or next life will come to the Nibbana (Buddhahood or Arahanthood). However, he or she will follow the monks or the nuns hood to upgrade their willing to attain of Nibbana. Like one probe  from Buddha directly that “As you sow, so shall you reap..” Who offers to the monks (Sangha), which they already keep their seed to their own sake next.

Meanwhile, Vū often heard from the ritual masters describes an amulet as “a double-edged sword.” They cited numerous instances where ritual masters and clients had been punished by the gods for mistaken or careless magic. For example, ritual master Nguyễn Van An in Bắc Giang ceased to be a ritual master when he went mad, his family was ruined, and his domestic animals died. [8]  We can see the dangerous of the potent amulets here that can destroyed the masters of rituals and the wearers. Perhaps who wore the potent amulets like make a deal to ‘the spirit,’ which this ‘spirit’ still in the lokiya world, where they still have hatred, greedy and ignorance. In contrast that only the holy men mean Arahants, and all Buddhas haven’t (hadn’t) had hatred, greedy and ignorance. Any risk of wear the potent amulets should rethink and re-choose to selective the best one without any fear.   

By the way, According to the Frits Staal that makes the provocative claim of ritual is meaningless.[9] With this characterization Staal proposes to problematize various ritual theories. Staal argues tha ritual is primarily self-referential: ritual is pure activity; it follows a particular set of rules or syntax; it is not symbolic; it has no goal [outside itself?].[10] With his statement, I will suggest that not necessary to ritual or wear the potent amulets, because the ritual to wear of the potent amulets is only conceptual minded and maybe speculation in his or her wished. But, sometime rituals needed to make the societies together.

Moreover, in Dhammapada XII; No: 160 that Buddha’s word said:

Atthā hi attano nātho

Ko hi nātho paro siyā

Attanā hi sudantena

Nāthaṁ labhati dullabhaṁ

“ One truly is the protector of oneself;

Who else could the protector be?

With oneself fully controlled,

One gains a mastery that is hard to gain.”

Buddha advised to all people to be the owner of him or her-self that not depend to him, god, divine, teacher, witch, potent amulet and so on. Only by himself that people can be liberation or be jailor.  

REFERENCES:

Budge, Wallis E. A. Amulet & Magic. Oxon: Routledge, 2001.

Buddha’s Word (Dhammapada). The Buddha’s Path of Wisdom. Indonesia: Bahussuta Society, 2012.

Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. The Buddhist Saints of the Forest and the Cult of Amulets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

Tannenbaum, Nicola. Tattoos: Invulnerability and power in Shan Cosmology. JSTOR, American Ethnologist, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Nov., 1987).

Paine, Sheila. Amulets: A World of Secret Powers, Charms and Magic. London: Thames & Hudson, 2004.

Swearer, Donald K. Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. JSTOR, History of Religions, Vol. 34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism (Feb., 1959), p. 279-280.

Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998.

Webster, Richard. Write your own magic: The Hidden Power in Your Words. St. Paul: Llewellyn Publications, 2004.

Vajirañāṇavarorasa, Somdet Phra Mahā Samaṇa Chao Krom Phrayā. Navakovāda: Intructions for Newly-Ordained Bhikkhus and Sāmaṇeras. Bangkok: Mahamakuta Rajavidyalaya Faoundation Under Royal Patronage, 2551/2008.

Vū, Hông Thuât. Amulets and the Marketplace. JSTOR, Asian Ethnology, Vol. 67, No. 2, Popular Religion and the Sacred Life of Material Goods in Contemporary Vietnam (2008).

Retrieve on 15 October, http://books.simonandschuster.com/Amulets/Sheila-Paine/9781594770258/excerpt#sthash.UmbGt3EV.dpuf

Retrieve on 20 October 2014, https://ahaina.wordpress.com/category/the-grand-5-sacred-buddha-amulets/

Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://www.mybuddha108.com/article_and_tips/benja_pakee.html

Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://thailand-charms-amulets.blogspot.com/

Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://sanaakosirickylee.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/the-curious-case-of-a-powerful-relationship-thai-amulet/

Retrieve on 16 October 2014, http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread981654/pg1

Retrieve on 18 October 2014, http://www.thailandamulet.com/

---

[1] Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.

[2] Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.

[3] Ibid. p. 58.

[4] Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.58.

[5] Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.73.

[6] Stengs, Irene. Collectible Amulets: The Triple Fethishes of Modern Thai Men. JSTOR, Etnofoor, Vol. 11, no. 1, COLLECTING (1998), p.67.

[7] Tannenbaum, Nicola. Tattoos: Invulnerability and power in Shan Cosmology. JSTOR, American Ethnologist, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Nov., 1987), p. 707.

[8] Vū, Hông Thuât. Amulets and the Marketplace. JSTOR, Asian Ethnology, Vol. 67, No. 2, Popular Religion and the Sacred Life of Material Goods in Contemporary Vietnam (2008), p. 241.

[9] Frits Staal, “The meaninglessness of Ritual,” Numen 16 (June 1979): 2-22. Quoted from Swearer, Donald K. Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. JSTOR, History of Religions, Vol. 34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism (Feb., 1959), p. 279-280.

[10] Catherine Bell challenges the construction of the autonomy of ritual in her notion of “ritualization’: “If we take seriously the idea that even the exact repetition of an age old ritual precedent is a strategic act with which to define the present, then no ritual style is autonomous,” That is ritual cannot be understood apart from its immediate situation (Bell [n. 11 above], p. 101). Quoted from Swearer, Donald K. Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. JSTOR, History of Religions, Vol. 34, No. 3, Image and Ritual in Buddhism (Feb., 1959), p. 279-280.